|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 5208 days) Posts: 31 From: Washington, USA Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Alternative Cosmology? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
CosmicAtheist Member (Idle past 5208 days) Posts: 31 From: Washington, USA Joined: |
Recently I have been taking a small break from Evolution to go back to a topic of strong interest in my past: Cosmology. This is really nothing new but I just wanted to get a discussion going:
Open Letter on Cosmology What has the scientific community that specializes in cosmology have to say about this or had said? I also recall some conferences that were organized about the issue. One of their arguments are based on how the BBT requires the addition of things like dark matter that have not been observed or w/e and is just speculative. See the article for yourself and tell me what you think. More info: A Cosmology Group Do you think the recent results for the XENON100 will stimulate a new pool of ideas on our current cosmological model (BBT) or perhaps seek to formulate a new model/competing model all together? XEON link: Search for Dark Matter Still Empty-Handed, Scientists Say | Space I am not arguing against the BBT but out of my lack of understanding in comparison with many people here on the forums, I would like to get familiar with these other concepts. Edited by CosmicAtheist, : No reason given. Edited by CosmicAtheist, : No reason given. Edited by CosmicAtheist, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminSlev Member (Idle past 4957 days) Posts: 113 Joined: |
Thread copied here from the Alternative Cosmology? thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
tesla Member (Idle past 1909 days) Posts: 1199 Joined: |
quote: I do not believe those results alone will be enough. But i am pleased to see that data is being collected. One problem that physicists and other scientists are haveing with matter; is that outside the condition of extreme gravitational forces, heavier elements do not have the sufficient environment to remain stable. trying to create dark matter on earth is like trying to keep a human body alive in space with no spacesuit. the vacuum just rips it apart. I do not have the sufficient education to further comment, however i will watch the discussion in hopes i might learn something ![]() keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is ~parmenides
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
slevesque Member (Idle past 4957 days) Posts: 1456 Joined: |
I think this is a very interesting topic to look after in the up coming years. I could see a paradigm shift coming in cosmology if enough counter-evidence to the current BBT can pile up to become unavoidable.
Dark matter and energy are areas where I could see the paradigm shifting early. I'm sure cavediver remembers how I once called them fudge factors, and I still think they are. It's like back when Newton's theory of universal gravity came to explain a lot of incredible things, but failed to explain the precession of the perihelion of the orbit of Mercury. To explain the difference, an ''unknown'' planet named Vulcan was hypothesied to exist.Some looked for that planet for over 50 years. We now know that the answer lied elsewhere, namely new physics with Einstein's relativity. I think it is a distinct possibility that the same is happening with dark matter. We have been searching for it for what, at least 20-30 years now ? With no concensus on what it is, and only very disputed evidence of it's detection. Maybe then the answer to the discrepencies dark matter is hypothesied to explain will in fact be answered from another direction, maybe new physics once again ? I'm sure the old-schoolers in physics such as Cavediver will disagree with me. But then again, that's why we need young and naive New-comers on the scene like me ![]() AbE I read a quote on that phenomenon once, something along the liens of ''science progresses with the replacement of the old minds''. (It may be something worded totally differently, but this was the essence of the message) Edited by slevesque, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
CosmicAtheist Member (Idle past 5208 days) Posts: 31 From: Washington, USA Joined: |
I wonder what this would mean though? How much changing in our understanding in Cosmology/Astronomy will be required? Will we then have to find new methods of measuring distant objects or throw some theories away? What would this entail?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10385 Joined: Member Rating: 5.7 |
Do you think the recent results for the XENON100 will stimulate a new pool of ideas on our current cosmological model (BBT) or perhaps seek to formulate a new model/competing model all together? I think these results will stimulate a new pool of ideas on how to detect dark matter particles. The gravitational effects of dark matter are accepted by most, and the XENON100 results (or rather non-results) do not cast doubt on this data. To use an analogy, in the generation after Galileo many were still skeptical of heliocentrism and they had a similar gripe. No one had observed stellar parallax. Surely we should see stars wobbling in the night sky if we were moving about the sun. Well, they were wobbling but not as much as some people expected them too. They had to wait for methodology and technology to catch up. This may very well be the case for dark matter.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
CosmicAtheist Member (Idle past 5208 days) Posts: 31 From: Washington, USA Joined: |
Perhaps, which is why I am not completely against the BBT, but I have read some websites with stimulating new ideas as you mentioned. But don't you think after 30 years of failing to detect dark matter that there should be more funding towards alternative explanations like plasma cosmology? I am not saying they should ditch dark matter but open up new possibilities.
Plasma cosmology - Wikipedia Wiki on Plasma Cosmology, interesting stuff.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
slevesque Member (Idle past 4957 days) Posts: 1456 Joined: |
New physics would probably change a lot of things, but I do think that they would still be compatible with a Big Bang type of cosmology. This is because it would have to be compatible with universal gravity and General relativity. It won't come in and contradict those two.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
CosmicAtheist Member (Idle past 5208 days) Posts: 31 From: Washington, USA Joined: |
Interestingly enough I was reading on how Einsteins theory could be wrong and need a bigger revamp in New Physics than we thought:
No webpage found at provided URL: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=was-einstein-wrong-about-relativity
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
slevesque Member (Idle past 4957 days) Posts: 1456 Joined: |
Do you have the whole article ???
Because just that intro didn't inspire me any confidence in the knowledge of the author. radio waves propagate through the air ?? Seriously ? AbE And as CD said, you should always have a healthy very high level of skepticism when someone claims Relativity could be wrong. It's one of the most verified theory in all of science in my opinion. Edited by slevesque, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
cavediver Member (Idle past 3960 days) Posts: 4129 From: UK Joined: |
Interestingly enough I was reading on how Einsteins theory could be wrong and need a bigger revamp in New Physics than we thought: No, just yet another case of idiot layman science writers not having the first clue about what they are writing. We've covered this common misunderstanding several times here at EvC, yet the popular science press can still make money by printing bullshit.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
CosmicAtheist Member (Idle past 5208 days) Posts: 31 From: Washington, USA Joined: |
No you have to pay for that, sorry I was foolish enough to post such. So I will give you another link:
No webpage found at provided URL: http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/44738 Once again I am just asking questions, come from an ignorant perspective and like learning what other people say hence why I post here.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
CosmicAtheist Member (Idle past 5208 days) Posts: 31 From: Washington, USA Joined: |
Could you link me to some threads for me to read?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
cavediver Member (Idle past 3960 days) Posts: 4129 From: UK Joined: |
Dark matter and energy are areas where I could see the paradigm shifting early. I'm sure cavediver remembers how I once called them fudge factors, and I still think they are. That's 'cos you still don't understand them ![]() Dark matter on the other hand was a surprise, and requires a much more complex answer. However, the vast majority of observations suggest that cold dark matter (WIMPs) forms the primary component, as opposed to just about every other conceivable way of changing physics to accomodate observation. Critics seem to have this bizarre notion that we guess an answer that seems cool, and then consider the problem solved. Although a tempting way of working, surprisingly real science does not progress this way...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
cavediver Member (Idle past 3960 days) Posts: 4129 From: UK Joined: |
Could you link me to some threads for me to read? I'm crap at linking stuff. Just use search with "entanglement" and "bell's theorem" and you'll find more than enough.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2025